My experiences at a woman's programming workshop • Hacker News Board

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#111

Post by spinks » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:42 PM UTC

mrleinad wrote: post #18

jellicle wrote: post #11

That's not a call for single-sex education. That's a call for good teachers who are willing to crack down on the class clown. There's always a class clown, and he always needs to be cracked down upon for the good of the class. This is teaching 101. Sorry you didn't have a good teacher. >Dave was really excited by the class, and, like me and the other volunteers, had a lot of experience with Python. Sounds like Dave w…

> That's a learned technique for getting assistance. It worked on you, didn't it? I was going to point out the same thing. A women playing dumb to get help from a man, is not uncommon at all.

I think it goes further than that. I've seen smart women I know do the same thing with me (and I'm female and a coder) -- like suddenly acting as though they're idiots when they've already proved it isn't true. I think it speaks for a gutwrenching lack of confidence, some of these people are OK with learning skills but don't actually believe in their own ability to apply them.

What they need probably is a mix of more attention, a kick up the bum, and being encouraged to go and help other people who are less progressed (because that will actually build their confidence.)

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#112

Post by smsm42 » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:45 PM UTC

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #59

NotMyMorals wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is probably why pwpwp didn't specifically refer to the self-selected women in the class, but made a general point about the industry and the ridiculous attempts to impose a completely artificial 50/50 gender ratio. The comic could have just as easily said "one girl is good at math therefore exactly as many girls as boys are good at math."

While I agree a 50-50 gender ratio seems artificial at the moment, fact of the matter is the tech industry is becoming one of the great sources of power in society (think skynet). I think for the sake of civilization, we should try to involve women as much as we can and aim for the 50-50.

Currently, there are substantially more females than males (60/40) among people receiving college degrees: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/06/women-dominate-higher-ed...

Education is the widely recognized source of power. Should we strive for 50/50 and if so, how should we achieve it?

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#113

Post by jamesbritt » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:50 PM UTC

irahul wrote: post #109

jamesbritt wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim is that there is a notable difference in group dynamics.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits. And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation? How about divide on gender, then divide on introvert-extrovert, then divide on active-passive, then divide on "external validation seeker"-"doesn't give a shit about external validation", then divide on "interested in lear…

I am not implying that you are supporting gender-segregated education. I am making a general point.

I was just trying to describe a point of view, not one I myself hold.

I think that division by sex is often used as a proxy for division based on learning styles. Not fast vs slow per se, but in how people respond to teaching styles and student interaction.

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#114

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:52 PM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #100

Alex3917 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's a call for good teachers who are willing to crack down on the class clown. There's always a class clown, and he always needs to be cracked down upon for the good of the class. This is teaching 101. Sorry you didn't have a good teacher." Most of the people who lecture at these events are programmers, not folks who have a masters in teaching along with their state certification.

Certification and ability are different things. Contrary to popular belief, certification does not magically endow somebody with abilities, it only (slightly) raises the chances that person possesses necessary abilities. However there are a lot of people perfectly capable of teaching without certificates, and, unfortunately, plenty of people with certificates totally incapable of doing so. Looks like the author of th…

[deleted]

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#115

Post by king_jester » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:54 PM UTC

whalesalad wrote: post #69

I think we simply need to start calling people out in person regardless of their gender. If I saw "Dave" acting like this I'd pull him aside and set him straight. And if he couldn't pull his shit together i'd ask him to leave. And if he couldn't manage to do that, I'd help him leave. Not that your post is passive-aggressive, but we need to start being proactive about this. In all realms of life. Call people out on th…

When someone who has your same privilege (male privilege in this case) and they are using that, intentionally or otherwise, to derail a conversation or attack another person, you absolutely should call them out if you feel safe about doing so.

You certainly can call out oppressive behavior from others that don't share your privilege or background, but a lot of times that behavior isn't standing against oppressive BS, but rather reinforcing it. In this very discussion, there any several posters who are disregarding the OPs experience so that their opinions about sexism and male dominance in the classroom aren't challenged.

The fact of the matter is this classroom was an audience of (mostly) women who had selected an environment that would have almost none or no men attending. We can't simply blame that audience and teacher for not standing up to an aggressive male when the whole point of this kind of class to leave those people out in the first place. I also don't blame the OP for not speaking out, but it's important to note once you learn that this kind of behavior is wrong, you can call someone out on it if you feel you are safe to do so.

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#116

Post by irahul » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:54 PM UTC

ClHans wrote: post #94

Dear HNers, Gender bias is a touchy subject in these tech blogs and the responses to this (yet another) article are, predictably, dismissive. It was one person's fault, there's no widespread gender bias, the instructor should have things differently, someone has seen women be jerks too, etc. So while there really does seem to be a measurable, observable difference in gender involvement in computing (e.g. in CS enroll…

> Gender bias is a touchy subject in these tech blogs and the responses to this (yet another) article are, predictably, dismissive. It was one person's fault, there's no widespread gender bias, the instructor should have things differently, someone has seen women be jerks too, etc.

It was one person's fault, the instructor should have done things differently, some women are jerks(just like some men). The way you are enumerating says you don't believe they are true, when they are. As for "widespread gender bias", I don't know. I haven't seen it in action myself(I have seen the reverse though - women getting preferential treatment). I am not denying it - I am just saying I am not in a position to confirm or deny.

> So while there really does seem to be a measurable, observable difference in gender involvement in computing (e.g. in CS enrollments, in working in the industry, etc), these anecdotes always get tossed as not significant.

High school kids get into CS enrollments. I would love to hear from them why they don't go for CS enrollments, rather than hearing speculations. I have heard students complaining about nerdy culture, more demanding courses, low grades, low female to male ratio(circular - if you don't come in, it's going to be always low), anti-social(non-party) students etc. Do you believe girls don't enroll in CS courses because they believe there male counterparts will discriminate against them? If so, can you please provide me some citations.

> Like, what sorts of articles would people _not_ jump on the bandwagon to tear to shreds?

The sort of articles where the conclusion follows from the antecedents.

1. I volunteered to teach a women's only class.

1.5 It was going well. Some young girl, who was doing well, just giggled and told me she has no idea what she is doing.

2. Some Dave walked in and derailed it.

3. I got angry, but the women just tuned out.

4. Hence, gender bias is real.

How does 4 follow from any of it?

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#117

Post by NotMyMorals » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:56 PM UTC

irahul wrote: post #109

jamesbritt wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim is that there is a notable difference in group dynamics.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits. And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation? How about divide on gender, then divide on introvert-extrovert, then divide on active-passive, then divide on "external validation seeker"-"doesn't give a shit about external validation", then divide on "interested in lear…

I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits.

I don't see anyone suggesting such a thing, but instead, that the majority of each gender may have certain behavior and learning styles in common.

And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation?

Why go any further? Just because one type of segregation may work, doesn't mean that all types of segregation would work.

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#118

Post by irahul » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:57 PM UTC

jamesbritt wrote: post #113

irahul wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits. And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation? How about divide on gender, then divide on introvert-extrovert, then divide on active-passive, then divide on "external validation seeker"-"doesn't give a shit about external validation", then divide on "interested in lear…

I am not implying that you are supporting gender-segregated education. I am making a general point. I was just trying to describe a point of view, not one I myself hold. I think that division by sex is often used as a proxy for division based on learning styles. Not fast vs slow per se, but in how people respond to teaching styles and student interaction.

> I think that division by sex is often used as a proxy for division based on learning styles. Not fast vs slow per se, but in how people respond to teaching styles and student interaction.

Which brings me back to my initial point. Is there data that suggests males and females respond significantly differently to teaching styles, and all member of a group(male or female) are consistent?

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#119

Post by Tichy » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 5:59 PM UTC

NotMyMorals wrote: post #46

Tichy wrote: post #33

What part of the experience showed that single sex workshops might be better? Because there wouldn't be female knowledgeable jerks (either because women are never jerks, or because they are never knowledgeable, or why?)? Or smart women would not be self-deprecating among other women?

Or maybe women would respond to knowledgeable female jerks differently and perhaps more effectively than to knowledgeable male jerks?

The possibilities are endless.

Re: My experiences at a woman's programming workshop

#120

Post by irahul » Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 6:07 PM UTC

NotMyMorals wrote: post #117

irahul wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits. And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation? How about divide on gender, then divide on introvert-extrovert, then divide on active-passive, then divide on "external validation seeker"-"doesn't give a shit about external validation", then divide on "interested in lear…

I find it hard to believe that all females(or males) exhibit same behavioral and learning traits. I don't see anyone suggesting such a thing, but instead, that the majority of each gender may have certain behavior and learning styles in common. And even if this happens to be true, then why stop at gender-segregation? Why go any further? Just because one type of segregation may work, doesn't mean that all types of seg…

> I don't see anyone suggesting such a thing, but instead, that the majority of each gender may have certain behavior and learning styles in common.

Unless you can prove that certain behavior is common among majority of females, and that certain common behavior is more significant than bazillion traits which are not shared, and then that certain behavior is significant to learning, and is more important than traits which aren't shared - the segregation is meaningless.

> Why go any further? Just because one type of segregation may work, doesn't mean that all types of segregation would work.

The chances that a group of students is going to be consistent, coherent, and will respond to the teaching style in the same way is essentially zero(group size > 1). If gender segregation show a noticeable, significant improvement; by all means have it. But don't make claims in advance.